STATE BANK OF BIKANER & JAIPUR Vs. KUKAR SONS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REJOINDER to the reply filed by the respondents 1, 2 and 4 today in Court is taken or record. Copy furnished to the Counsel opposite.

(2.) Notice to 5th respondent was also taken already by publication in the newspaper and none has put in appearance on behalf of 5th respondent.

(3.) DURING the course of the arguments, the learned Counsel for the applicant/appellant stated that the copy of the impugned order was not served upon the applicant/appellant but the applicant/appellant got a copy of the order on 27.10.2001 when the defendants in the suit wrote a letter to the applicant-Bank enclosing the said copy. The learned Counsel for the applicant also contended that when the Counsel found the copy sent to the Counsel for drafting the appeal was not certified copy, the Bank was asked to produce a certified copy. According to the learned Counsel for the applicant/appellant, it was thereafter, on 5.12.2001, an application for certified copy was made, and a copy was obtained on 11.12.2001.